May It Please the Court

‘Splendidly Leading the Way’? Archbishop Fisher and Decolonisation in British Colonial Africa

“…95 In similar vein in May 1959 -at the height of party political dispute over Africa -Fisher suggested to the bishop of Mashonaland that if only British parties could come to a 'common mind' it 'would do more than anything else to help you out in Central Africa'. 96 Earlier he had expressed relief that with his absence from the Britain he would be unable to speak in the debate about central Africa as, with 'everybody shouting', the 'voice of reason and reconciliation can hardly be heard'. 97 He thus came to offer a different question to that which dominated the later years of British decolonisation: the best way forward in central Africa was not just deliberating between 'too fast and too slow', but, 'for everybody to ask: "What has been done wrong, by commission or omission, and where does the fault on my side lie"-and never mind about the fault on the other side'.…”

“…18 At other times his intense engagement with one colony squeezed out consideration of others, as he was to admit was the case with Kenya in the early 1950s when interest in the colony was superseded by his close involvement with the affairs of the Kabaka in Uganda, or when during the critical period following the declaration of emergencies in central Africa in spring 1959 Fisher was away in the Far East. 19 Political issues significant for the church and Fisher did not of course present themselves uniformly across the colonial empire. It is a commonplace that Britain's empires were many and diverse, and particular issues presented themselves in different places even within one region.…”

Introduction

“…The first we have described elsewhere as paralegal rules and the second as legal rules. 2 It is their relationship that is important. Paralegal rules may be described as descriptions of the fundamental Grundnorms which underlie the system and drive it in a particular direction, and legal rules may be described as prescriptions of the procedures and processes for decision-making by regulators and of the behaviour and conduct required of those undertaking operational activities.…”

Northeast First Nation participation in the British Columbia oil and gas policy community

“…All reasonable efforts were not made to consult and thus MOF did not meet its fiduciary obligations. 30 In the appeal two of the higher court judges concurred with the trial judge saying that any interference with the right to hunt was a prima facie infringement on treaty rights; however they diverged from the lower court's decision that the preferred means related to a place (close to the reserve) but rather meant a method or mode of hunting and that the Tusdzuh was not 'unspoiled' as it had been subject to previous oil and gas and mining activity. 31 The appeal judges went on to state that the legislative objectives of pursuing forestry development are sufficiently important to warrant infringement on treaty and Aboriginal rights as "those objectives include conservation, and the economic and cultural needs of all peoples and communities in the Province. "…”

“…Robin Fisher states that under Douglas there was consultation with Aboriginal groups about reserve size and placement but under Joseph Trutch and subsequent administrations, consultation effectively ended even about critical issues such as the size and placement of reserves. 30 Tennant asserts that the British Columbia government held this view into the 1990s. In the 1960s, the• province realized there were bound to be some Aboriginal title cases in the courts so they prepared their arguments for that eventuality.…”